Is multihoming hard? [was: DNS amplification]

Fri Mar 22 22:44:28 UTC 2013

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 15:16:57 -0500, Owen DeLong said:
> On Mar 20, 2013, at 9:55 AM, Seth Mattinen <sethm at rollernet.us> wrote:
> > Based on the average clue of your average residential subscriber (anyone
> > here need not apply) I'd say that's a good thing.

> If BGP were plug-and-play automated with settings specified by the provider,
> what would the user's clue level have to do with it?

The hypothetical existence of such a box doesn't change the fact that
providers have to make business decisions based on actual boxes and users.

Yes, if a plug-n-play idiot-proof BGP box existed, then the profit calculus
would be different.  On the other hand, if there existed a reliable
cost-effective means for faster-than-light signaling, if would drastically
change intercontinental peering patterns. All the same, anybody who's planning
their interconnects in 2013 reality and not looking at who has 40K km of
underwater cable and who doesn't is in for a surprise....

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 865 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20130322/11364d33/attachment.sig>